Bob Dunn

Having only just been introduced to your shows, but working my way backwards with available podcasts, I would like to ask the following:

Why is the Aquatic Ape theory so dismissed by the general scientific community when to me, it appears to provide a well thought out, rational, constructive alternative to the traditional idea of mans development and evolution route.

I have read various articles, seen Elaine Morgan on TED and even read Sir David Attenborough's thoughts on it. Why is there such a lack of debate - surely it's not the same as Scientology and Evolution?

Perhaps one should think of evolution as an evolutionary web, rather than an evolutionary tree. I think there is a lot of evidence that as humans and hominids migrated around the world, there would be branches that would become genetically isolated, and then interbreed with other humans... Eventually the more beneficial genes get selected for.

So it might be difficult to know if the whole human population passed through an "aquatic phase"... or say a fishing village split off then imparted genes back into the mainline evolution.

Much of Human Evolution has been dominated by Ice Ages, and relatively rapid climate changes (which we are now concerned about). During Ice Ages the CO2 content on the continents drops down to about 180ppm, largely due to a shift from atmosphere to sea. This alone, not considering the ice, would likely cause huge repercussions for continental life, and possibly favor marine life. But, it would also mean the water would become frigid. [xx(]

The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks.
Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors
and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators,
sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.